Dr. Marc Bekoff is Professor of Organismic Biology at
the University of Colorado, Boulder, and is Fellow of the Animal
Behavior Society and a former Guggenheim Fellow. He has done extensive
research in the area of animal behavior, cognitive ethology, and
behavioral ecology and has published over 150 papers and 12 books,
including Encyclopedia of Animal Rights and Animal Welfare (1998,
Greenwood) and Strolling With Our Kin: Speaking For and Respecting
Voiceless Animals (American Anti-Vivisection Society, 2000). His work
has been featured on 48 Hours, in Time Magazine, Life Magazine, U.S.
News and World Report, the New York Times, on NPR, and in a National
Geographic Society television special. The AVAR interviewed Dr. Bekoff
about his work, including his opinions on various topics related to
human interaction with nonhuman beings.

AVAR: Was there any particular event in your life which
compelled you to study the emotions and behavior of nonhuman animals?

Bekoff: There were a number of events, but I feel I was
predisposed to do this sort of work before they occurred. I never really
deeply thought about these issues but rather always had deep feelings
about them. My parents, although to some extent they still can't figure
out how I came to the profession that I'm pursuing, tell me that I have
always "minded" animals. Although I was not raised with animals, I used
to ask about what they might be thinking or feeling as they went about
their daily activities. I feel that I have been blessed with a keen
sensitivity of the plight of other animals and all other "beings" in the
world. I am a vitalist and see and feel life in everything, animate and
inanimate. I hated doing dissection and vivisection in high school and
college, and much preferred watching animals. I refused to participate
in dissection labs; these types of labs offended me, and especially the
ones in medical school.

AVAR: What would you characterize as the main
differences between animal welfarists and animal rightists?

Bekoff: People who believe that it's permissible to
cause pain to nonhuman animals, but not unnecessary pain, argue that if
we consider the animals' welfare or well-being -- their quality of life
-- that's all we need to do. These people are called "welfarists" and
they practice "welfarism." Welfarists believe that, while people should
not wantonly exploit nonhuman animals, as long as we make their lives
comfortable, physically and psychologically, we're respecting their
welfare. If animals experience comfort and some of life's pleasures,
appear happy, and are free from prolonged or intense pain, fear, hunger
and other unpleasant states, they're doing fine. But welfarists don't
believe that nonhuman animals' lives have inherent value. Their lives
are valuable merely because of their utility or use -- value to humans.
Basically, welfarists are utilitarians who believe that dogs, cats,
prairie dogs, or any other animals can be exploited as long as the pain
and suffering that the animals experience -- the costs of using the
animals to the animals -- are less important than the benefits to humans
that are gained by using the animals. Rightists also are concerned with
animals' quality of life. However, they argue it's wrong to abuse or
exploit them, to cause them any pain and suffering, and that nonhuman
animals shouldn't be used by humans. They believe animals have certain
moral and legal rights including the right to life and the right not to
be harmed. According to Gary Francione, a professor of law at Rutgers
University, to say an animal has a "right" to have an interest protected
means the animal is entitled to have that interest protected even if it
would benefit us to do otherwise. Rightists also stress that animals'
lives are inherently valuable; their lives aren't valuable because of
their utility to humans. Animals aren't "less valuable" than humans.
Also, animals are neither property nor "things," but rather living
organisms, subjects of a dignified life, who are worthy of our support,
friendship, compassion, and respect. Any amount of pain and death is
unnecessary and unacceptable.

AVAR: Those who aspire to perpetuate the use of nonhuman
beings for human purposes often use intellectual differences as a
justification for doing so. Could you expound upon the reasons why this
position has little merit?

Bekoff: Almost all nonhuman animals are "smart" in their
own ways. "Smart" and "intelligent" are words that are often misused:
dogs do what they need to do to be dogs -- they are dog-smart in their
own ways. And monkeys do what they need to do to be monkeys -- they are
monkey-smart in their own ways. Neither is necessarily smarter than the
other. It's important to stress that "smart" and "intelligent" are
loaded words and often are misused. The misunderstanding and
misapplication of the notions of smartness and intelligence can have
significant and serious consequences for nonhuman animals, especially if
they're thought to be dumb and insensitive to pain and suffering. Many
people are always trying to up the ante in attempts to separate humans
from other animals. They discover activities in which humans engage but
in which no other animals are known to engage, and then use these
examples to claim that humans are not only special and much smarter than
other animals, but also unique. Tool-using was one such criterion for
separating humans from other animals until Jane Goodall discovered tool
use in chimpanzees. Language was another until it became clear that some
animals have sophisticated communication systems that share various
features of human languages. And, animals do things that we can't do. Is
a dog who can sniff other dogs from a distance, or a bat who can use
high-pitched sounds to find prey, special to the point that they're
better or worth more than humans who can't perform these behaviors? Of
course not. And neither are humans who can play chess, build and program
computers, or anticipate paying taxes in the United States on April 15
or worry about Y2K better or worth more than other animals.

AVAR: Could you share some of the important findings
from your studies of the emotions of some of the other living beings who
share this planet with us and how these findings should shape human
behavior?

Bekoff: Basically, I and some of my colleagues have
discovered that many animals experience fear, joy, happiness, shame,
embarrassment, resentment, jealousy, rage, anger, various forms of
anxiety, love, pleasure, compassion, respect, relief, disgust, sadness,
despair, grief, and surprise. They may even have senses of humor. Their
emotional states are easily recognizable. Just look at their faces,
their eyes, and the way they carry themselves. Even people with little
or no experience observing other animals usually agree with one another
on what an animal is most likely feeling. And their intuitions are borne
out because they use their characterization of animal emotional states
to predict future behavior rather accurately. Knowing that many animals
have rich and deep emotional lives, and also that many animals suffer
and feel pain, should make it even more clear that humans just can't
march about and harm and kill other animals whenever they want to do it,
not even for supposed human benefits.

AVAR: Where do you see the animal rights movement in ten
years?

Bekoff: I am a down-home optimist. I have a vision of a
world in which animals will not be harmed and killed by humans for
purely anthropocentric ends. I advocate patience, although I surely get
very impatient with animal abusers. However, telling others what to do
doesn't work. Long-lasting changes are more productive than short-term
changes. The changes must be changes of the heart -- deep changes -- and
not superficial changes that are short-lived. Animal abuse is
particularly upsetting but I also ache when I feel trees being felled,
water ways being changed, and inanimate landscapes being decimated. My
vitalistic sense is offended by all destruction. I am a dreamer and have
visions of many better tomorrows. I urge that we all practice peace and
justice, and express compassion, respect, and love for the rest of the
world. May we all, as a tight and committed community, work toward these
goals.

** Fair Use Notice**
This document may contain copyrighted material, use of which has not been
specifically authorized by the copyright owners. I believe that this
not-for-profit, educational use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the
copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law). If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your
own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner.